Federal prosecutors are still weighing whether to pursue the death penalty in the case of a Kneeland man accused of murdering one of his workers at a marijuana growing operation in 2010.

Last week, a federal judge ordered that attorneys for Mikal Xylon Wilde, 31, be allowed to analyze evidence in the case to give them an opportunity to argue that Wilde should not face the death penalty during his trial on charges of murder and drug trafficking.

Wilde stands accused of fatally shooting Mario Roberto Juarez-Madrid and seriously wounding Fernando Lopez, both of Santa Rosa, Guatemala, at the scene of a large-scale marijuana farm in Kneeland on Aug. 25, 2010. The shootings allegedly occurred after a dispute over whether Wilde would pay the men he'd hired to tend the more than 1,500 marijuana plants on his sprawling Kneeland property.

The U.S. Attorney's Office secured a six-count indictment of Wilde and took over the case in March, making it the first Humboldt County murder in decades to be federally prosecuted. According to documents seeking to compel prosecutors to turn over evidence to the defense, Wilde's attorneys indicate that while the U.S. Attorney's Office has yet to decide whether capital punishment is appropriate in the case, the office is preparing to submit a recommendation to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in the near future.

Federal prosecutors' internal process of determining whether to pursue capital punishment in a case is confidential, and calls to spokespeople for U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California seeking comment on Wilde's case went unreturned. It remains unclear exactly where in the deliberation process the case is and whether prosecutors will ultimately petition Holder to pursue the death penalty in the case.

In an order issued last week, U.S. Magistrate Judge Nathanael Cousins ordered that a computer hard drive held by prosecutors be turned over to the defense so they can analyze its contents as they prepare to meet with a federal Capital Review Committee that will be tasked with making a recommendation to Holder in the case.

The hard drive belonged to Tom Tuohy, a business associate of Wilde's in Sacramento who allegedly rented farm equipment to Wilde that was used at the Kneeland marijuana farm and who connected Wilde with Juarez-Madrid and Lopez, both of whom worked for Tuohy's business.

Prosecutors allege that Tuohy told investigators that, a couple of weeks before the shootings, he received an email from Wilde asking if anyone would "miss" Lopez if he "disappeared." Tuohy reportedly claimed that he responded to Wilde's email in a joking manner before deleting the email exchange from his computer.

Tuohy's computer shows no record of the exchange, according to prosecutors, but Wilde's attorneys sought to analyze it for themselves to see if they could find evidence to refute Tuohy's claims about the exchange.

"The government is likely to rely on Mr. Tuohy's testimony as a part of its case to establish that Mr. Wilde was the person who shot the victims and that his conduct was premeditated," Kalar wrote in a motion to compel discovery filed with the court June 7. "The defense needs to review a mirror copy of the computer hard drive in order to evaluate the credibility of Mr. Tuohy's anticipated testimony."

Shortly after his arrest the day following the shootings, Wilde was charged by the Humboldt County District Attorney's Office with murder and attempted murder. At a preliminary hearing to determine if there was sufficient evidence to hold Wilde to stand trial on the state charges, prosecutors introduced evidence from two eye-witnesses, including Lopez, and that Wilde made a confession to investigators.

Wilde was indicted federally March 1, 2012 on charges of murder during the commission of a narcotics offense, conspiracy to manufacture and distribute 1,000 or more marijuana plants and possession with intent to distribute 1,000 or more marijuana plants and the use of a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking offense. Wilde faces a sentence of 20 years to life in federal prison or the death penalty, as well as a fine of up to $10 million, in the case.

After the federal indictment, the DA's Office dropped the state charges facing Wilde to make way for his federal prosecution.

Testimony during Wilde's preliminary hearing indicated that the shooting came after a dispute broke out between him and his employees. According to the testimony, Wilde told Juarez-Madrid, Lopez and a third man hired to work the property, Christopher Bigelow, that he didn't have money to fuel a truck the men used to water the plants and that consequently, the men would have to irrigate crops on the sprawling property by hand.

The men then told Wilde they didn't want to work for him anymore, according to the testimony, and asked to be paid for the work they'd already performed and taken home to the Sacramento area. Wilde said he would pay them and take them home but then allegedly returned to the property the next day and opened fire.

Lopez spent several days testifying during the preliminary hearing, recounting for the court his allegations that Wilde shot him in the face before he spent a harrowing night fleeing from the defendant through the woods. Lopez testified that as he ran from Wilde after being shot, he heard Juarez-Madrid scream and saw him fall to the ground.

While being questioned by Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos during the hearing, Lopez testified that he and his fellow employees had believed earlier that they would be returning home after weeks of working on Wilde's ranch.

"When was it you realized that you, Roberto and Chris were not in fact going home that day?" Gallegos asked.

"I realized it when Mr. Mike arrived, pulled out a gun and shot me in the face," Lopez testified.

Wilde is next expected to appear in federal court for a status conference on Aug. 21.

Federal death penalty process

The process of determining whether the death penalty is appropriate in a federal prosecution is a long one. First, prosecutors must secure a criminal indictment of a defendant from a federal grand jury. If one of the indicted offenses is death-penalty eligible, the U.S. Attorney overseeing the case then would make a recommendation to the U.S. Attorney General as to whether or not they feel capital punishment is appropriate in the case. If prosecutors do pursue the death penalty, their recommendation would then be reviewed by the U.S. Attorney General and a Department of Justice Capital Review Committee, both of which would allow defense lawyers an opportunity to submit arguments in mitigation. Then, the U.S. Attorney General would make the final decision as to whether the death penalty will be sought. The process often takes months.

Federal death sentences are rare

Currently, only 59 federal inmates are on death row, including two in California. Since the death penalty was reinstated federally in 1988, U.S. Attorney Generals have authorized prosecutors to seek the death penalty in 467 cases. Of those, federal prosecutors have taken 182 -- involving 270 defendants -- to trial. Of the cases in which a jury ultimately made the determination between a life prison sentence and the death penalty, 138 resulted in life sentences and 69 in death sentences. Since 1988, only three people -- Timothy McVeigh, Juan Raul Garza and Louis Jones -- have been executed by the federal government.

Holder's track record

Since he took office in 2009, federal prosecutors have recommended that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder approve the death penalty in 61 cases. He has done so in seven instances.

Source: The office of the U.S. Attorney General and the nonprofit Death Penalty Information Center.